What crack are you on?
Have you looked at the patches in question?
They are small and non-intrusive.
We are relying on the ATA maintainer to tell us whether they
are dangerous, but they are so small that we should look at
fast-tracking them if possible.
Even if it was broken, it's new amd non intrusive so
it wouldn't break anything except itself. It's functionalityu that we've
wanted for a long time but haven't had. Now it's handed to us on a plate
and somehow you don't like that?
On Thu, 28 Feb 2002, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jul
> ian Elischer writes:
> >I think it's better to commit it now and have it fixed in situ.
> >It's new functionality so committing it with bugs will not break anyone.
> >it will however get more work done on it and more testing.
> > [...]
> >Well you are one of the main CAM peopel.. we are relying on you and
> Hmm, let me try that line of logic for a moment:
> I think we should have an Amdahl 6600 port of FreeBSD and
> we should commit it right now. [...]
> Well, you (Julian) you seem to have nothing to do.. we are
> relying on you and some other random people we can think
> Sounds weird, doesn't it ?
Have some KSE suggestions?
or some for a fully working correct DEVFS (unlike the one we have now)?
let me know..
> I don't know what axe you are grinding Julian, but if you are not
> the one to do the work, I don't think you are in a position to
> ask for "commit it now and have it fixed in situ".
Poul, I've reviewed it and find it ok.
The only reason to have the ATA reviewer look at it is because he is just
that: teh ATA maintainer. It's a low risk commit.
what axe are you grinding? Since you have nothing whatsoever to add?
> Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] | TCP/IP since RFC 956
> FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
> Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message